This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015CA0401
Joined Cases C-401/15 to C-403/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative — Luxembourg) — Noémie Depesme (C-401/15), Saïd Kerrou (C-401/15), Adrien Kauffmann (C-402/15), Maxime Lefort (C-403/15) v Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of movement of persons — Worker’s rights — Equal treatment — Social advantages — Financial aid for the pursuit of higher education studies — Requirement of a parent-child relationship — Concept of ‘child’ — Child of a spouse or registered partner — Contribution towards the maintenance of that child)
Joined Cases C-401/15 to C-403/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative — Luxembourg) — Noémie Depesme (C-401/15), Saïd Kerrou (C-401/15), Adrien Kauffmann (C-402/15), Maxime Lefort (C-403/15) v Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of movement of persons — Worker’s rights — Equal treatment — Social advantages — Financial aid for the pursuit of higher education studies — Requirement of a parent-child relationship — Concept of ‘child’ — Child of a spouse or registered partner — Contribution towards the maintenance of that child)
Joined Cases C-401/15 to C-403/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative — Luxembourg) — Noémie Depesme (C-401/15), Saïd Kerrou (C-401/15), Adrien Kauffmann (C-402/15), Maxime Lefort (C-403/15) v Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of movement of persons — Worker’s rights — Equal treatment — Social advantages — Financial aid for the pursuit of higher education studies — Requirement of a parent-child relationship — Concept of ‘child’ — Child of a spouse or registered partner — Contribution towards the maintenance of that child)
OJ C 46, 13.2.2017, p. 6–6
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
13.2.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 46/6 |
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative — Luxembourg) — Noémie Depesme (C-401/15), Saïd Kerrou (C-401/15), Adrien Kauffmann (C-402/15), Maxime Lefort (C-403/15) v Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche
(Joined Cases C-401/15 to C-403/15) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom of movement of persons - Worker’s rights - Equal treatment - Social advantages - Financial aid for the pursuit of higher education studies - Requirement of a parent-child relationship - Concept of ‘child’ - Child of a spouse or registered partner - Contribution towards the maintenance of that child))
(2017/C 046/07)
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Cour administrative
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Noémie Depesme (C-401/15), Saïd Kerrou (C-401/15), Adrien Kauffmann (C-402/15), Maxime Lefort (C-403/15)
Defendant: Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche
Operative part of the judgment
Article 45 TFEU and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union must be interpreted as meaning that a child of a frontier worker, who is able to benefit indirectly from the social advantages referred to in the latter provision, such as study finance granted by a Member State to the children of workers pursuing or who have pursued an activity in that Member State, means not only a child who has a child-parent relationship with that worker, but also a child of the spouse or registered partner of that worker, where that worker supports that child. The latter requirement is the result of a factual situation, which it is for the national authorities and, if appropriate, the national courts, to assess, and it is not necessary for them to determine the reasons for that contribution or make a precise estimation of its amount.
(1) OJ C 302, 14.9.2015, p. 27.